Ramu was working as a driver. Once driving his Bus along with conductor on his assigned route during peak traffic hours, when driving remains a stress, Ramu informed the conductor that he is feeling chest pain and unable

A claim for compensation for the death of an employee could be made under Section 3, read with Section 4 of the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923 only if the death of that employee had occurred due to an injury sustained by accident out of and in the course of his employment. It is well settled by judicial pronouncements that the word 'accident' should be taken to a mean a mishap or untoward event, not expected or designed; that if a person suffers heart attack and dies, it necessarily means that, there has been an injury to the heart and that, event being a mishap not expected or designed, is an accident. In the given case, the very nature of the work of the deceased, Ramu, was driving a heavy vehicle like a bus, which involves stress and strain, that too it is stated that he was driving the vehicle on his assigned route during peak traffic hours. Definitely during peak traffic hours, the drivers have to face a lot of stress and strain because of the movements of the vehicles and public and other persons moving on the road and driving the vehicles, which cannot be determined or measured with any apparatus. In the light of the above, if it can be reasonably established that the stress or exertion of driving during peak traffic hours was a contributory or aggravating factor, or at least the immediate trigger was work-related stress, then it can be said that the death of Ramu caused due to stress from work and can be considered to be death of an employee due to injury by accident arising out of and in the course of employment.